---
title: "Justice Department Argues Trump Can Ban CNN, MS NOW and Politico From the White House"
description: "A judge will hear the outlets’ bid for a longer injunction on Thursday, the day his order restoring their access expires."
author: "rews desk"
published: 2026-10-03T02:00:03.027Z
modified: 2026-10-03T09:46:00Z
url: https://rews.cc/a/justice-department-argues-trump-can-ban-cnn-ms-now-and-polit-7a36a0
language: en
tags: ["trump", "press", "first-amendment", "national-security", "law", "us"]
publisher: "Rews (https://rews.cc)"
---

# Justice Department Argues Trump Can Ban CNN, MS NOW and Politico From the White House

*A judge will hear the outlets’ bid for a longer injunction on Thursday, the day his order restoring their access expires.*

By rews desk · October 3, 2026 · https://rews.cc/a/justice-department-argues-trump-can-ban-cnn-ms-now-and-polit-7a36a0

## In brief

- The injunction hearing is Thursday, the day Judge Kelly’s two-week order restoring access expires
- The DOJ says it need not prove the outlets published classified information to justify the ban
- The White House flagged stories on the Iran war, the East Wing ballroom and the GOP midterm convention
- CNN was barred from a pool trip to Tennessee despite holding the scheduled rotation slot
- The outlets seek a First Amendment ruling to forestall further White House ‘shenanigans’

The Justice Department asked a federal judge late Friday to let President Trump reinstate his ban barring CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, arguing he need not prove the outlets actually published classified information.

The filing landed ahead of a hearing Thursday before Judge Timothy Kelly of Federal District Court in Washington on the outlets’ request for a preliminary injunction, a longer block that would stand while their lawsuit proceeds. The judge’s two-week order restoring the journalists’ access expires the same day, and he has told the parties he intends to “rule expeditiously,” MS NOW reported.

In its filing, the government argued that the three organizations had demonstrated “their willingness to publish information that undermines national security,” and that restricting their access “removes one avenue for these outlets to obtain such harmful information.” It offered no new evidence that the disputed stories contained classified material, and said it was not required to show the outlets “actually published classified information.” The argument treats even what the administration calls misinformation as a national security threat, CNN reported.

The Justice Department also said the president had concluded the outlets failed standards of “professionalism” owed by journalists granted the “privilege” of covering him from the White House grounds. Court precedent, the government contended, does not “prevent the President from concluding that bona fide journalists would identify sources instead of relying on anonymous sources, commit to factual accuracy, and provide the White House an opportunity to comment.”

On due process, the government said it had given the outlets their chance in letters the White House sent after the ban took effect. “Plaintiffs declined to submit any response, request any extension, or otherwise defend their conduct,” the filing said. “Accordingly, at 5:00pm last Friday, the President’s preliminary decision to revoke Plaintiffs’ continued access to the White House, though temporarily enjoined from continuing in effect, became final.” The outlets’ case rests, the filing said, on the mistaken idea “that there is a special property or legal interest in access to the White House. There is not.”

Theodore Boutrous, a lawyer for the three news organizations, said in a statement: “The White House’s filing tonight shows the President’s ‘ban on the free press’ is indefensible. The law is absolutely clear. The harm to our clients, the First Amendment, and the public as a whole is profound.”

Mr. Trump announced the ban last month in a social media post and afterward indicated it grew out of his general frustration with the outlets’ coverage. The White House later said stories about the Iran war, the construction of an East Wing ballroom and the Republican midterm convention had put national security at risk. The outlets’ lawyers, in a filing Monday, called the ban “an unlawful assault on the most fundamental First Amendment freedoms” and said the stories were precisely the kind of reporting the Constitution’s framers meant to protect.

After the ban was announced, officials deactivated and confiscated the outlets’ press badges, and the White House took nearly 12 hours to restore the credentials after Judge Kelly’s order, MS NOW reported. It has since kept curtailing the outlets’ role in the press pool, the rotating group that covers presidential events too small for the full press corps. On Saturday it barred CNN from traveling with the president to Tennessee, even though the network had been scheduled for that slot under the five-network television pool rotation.

Judge Kelly has so far decided only due process. His order last week found the Trump administration had cut off access without the advance notice and chance to object that precedent requires. The record, he wrote, was “bereft of any relevant ‘formally articulated standards’” in place before the revocations, and a standard offered in the White House’s Sept. 22 letters was “so vague it hardly does the trick.” Officials had also renewed the hard pass of Betsy Klein, a CNN correspondent, months after some of the flagged reporting ran, he wrote — “undercutting any argument” that she had notice a rule existed. The outlets’ lawyers want a First Amendment ruling to foreclose further “shenanigans” by the White House around the judge’s orders.

The judge has been here before. In 2018 he ordered the White House to return the credential of Jim Acosta, then a CNN correspondent, on similar due process grounds, and Mr. Acosta voluntarily dismissed that case before the First Amendment questions were reached. Circuit precedent holds that press access to the White House is protected by the First Amendment and cannot be revoked without due process. Whether Mr. Trump’s current ban also crosses the First Amendment line remains open. Arguments are set for Thursday.

## Sources

- [Justice Department asks court to let Trump reinstate White House press ban](https://cnn.com/2026/10/02/politics/justice-department-asks-court-allow-white-house-press-ban) — cnn.com
- [Trump administration insists in new court filing it can ban MS NOW, CNN and Politico from White House](https://ms.now/news/trump-white-house-media-ban-court-filing-ms-now) — ms.now